+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 13 12311 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 185

Thread: Civil War monument topic

  1. #1
    Champ RhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond repute RhythmDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ruston, LA
    Posts
    6,114

    Civil War monument topic

    I did not know this, but I found it on the internet, so it must be true.

    I'm curious if this person's history lesson changes anyone's perspective on this issue. The statement is below along with the supporting chart.




    I have been thinking a lot about Confederate monuments.

    This hits home particularly for me; a Confederate statue graces the old courthouse lawn back in my hometown of Perry, GA, just as one sits at the center of downtown Bentonville, AR where I used to work. As it turns out, both were erected around the same time: Bentonville's in 1908, and Perry's in 1909!

    Which got me thinking: 1909? Thatís strange. Thatís nearly half a century after the end of the Civil War. Why 1909?

    Hereís why: in the aftermath of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which upheld statesí rights to segregate public amenities, race was at the forefront of the national consciousness. In 1909, the NAACP was founded! And, at the same time, Jim Crow laws were designed to prevent black participation in democracy: between 1890 and 1910, ten of the eleven former Confederate states, starting with Mississippi, passed new constitutions or amendments that effectively disenfranchised most blacks and tens of thousands of poor whites through a combination of poll taxes, literacy and comprehension tests, and residency and record-keeping requirements. In Arkansas, for instance, the Streetcar Segregation Act (1903) assigned separate but equal sections of streetcars to blacks and whites.

    People today wrongly assume that Confederate monuments were built when the war concluded. The spate of Confederate monument building in the first ten years of the 20th century was actually a reactionary backlash against the integration of blacks as equals into our shared society.

    It would be one thing if the monument represented some swansong of the rebels, a nostalgic view of a fallen ideal. But timing is everything: 1909 was the time when whites deployed their money and power to monumentalize racist, anti-black sentiment. That is what those monuments stand for. As such, they cannot stand.
    PSA: Please realise the impotence of proof reading before you post.

  2. #2
    Champ FriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really niceFriscoDawg is just really nice
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Posts
    1,635

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it.

  3. #3
    Champ TYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond reputeTYLERTECHSAS has a reputation beyond repute TYLERTECHSAS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    44,116

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Quote Originally Posted by FriscoDawg View Post
    Those who forget their history are doomed to repeat it.
    Exactly! So the first post doesn't change my mind. Leave the statues up!!

  4. #4
    Champ DawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond reputeDawgyNWindow has a reputation beyond repute DawgyNWindow's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    Bridgeport, WV
    Posts
    2,244

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Quote Originally Posted by RhythmDawg View Post
    I did not know this, but I found it on the internet, so it must be true.

    I'm curious if this person's history lesson changes anyone's perspective on this issue. The statement is below along with the supporting chart.




    I have been thinking a lot about Confederate monuments.

    This hits home particularly for me; a Confederate statue graces the old courthouse lawn back in my hometown of Perry, GA, just as one sits at the center of downtown Bentonville, AR where I used to work. As it turns out, both were erected around the same time: Bentonville's in 1908, and Perry's in 1909!

    Which got me thinking: 1909? Thatís strange. Thatís nearly half a century after the end of the Civil War. Why 1909?

    Hereís why: in the aftermath of Plessy v. Ferguson (1896), which upheld statesí rights to segregate public amenities, race was at the forefront of the national consciousness. In 1909, the NAACP was founded! And, at the same time, Jim Crow laws were designed to prevent black participation in democracy: between 1890 and 1910, ten of the eleven former Confederate states, starting with Mississippi, passed new constitutions or amendments that effectively disenfranchised most blacks and tens of thousands of poor whites through a combination of poll taxes, literacy and comprehension tests, and residency and record-keeping requirements. In Arkansas, for instance, the Streetcar Segregation Act (1903) assigned separate but equal sections of streetcars to blacks and whites.

    People today wrongly assume that Confederate monuments were built when the war concluded. The spate of Confederate monument building in the first ten years of the 20th century was actually a reactionary backlash against the integration of blacks as equals into our shared society.

    It would be one thing if the monument represented some swansong of the rebels, a nostalgic view of a fallen ideal. But timing is everything: 1909 was the time when whites deployed their money and power to monumentalize racist, anti-black sentiment. That is what those monuments stand for. As such, they cannot stand.
    They should stand in Civil War battlefields and civil war museums. That's where all of them should be, confederate and union. I was shocked to see so many in Baltimore (confederates)!

    I think they should just cease with the whole public statue thing altogether. I guess it's the old graven image thing. I also think that rushing out to put the new Governor's name on all the state signs is pretty stupid too.

    For good measure, I think Teddy Roosevelt should be sandblasted from the face of Mt Rushmore. Why someone thought he belonged with Lincoln, Jefferson and Washington I will never understand.

  5. #5
    Champ RhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond reputeRhythmDawg has a reputation beyond repute RhythmDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2007
    Location
    Ruston, LA
    Posts
    6,114

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Quote Originally Posted by DawgyNWindow View Post
    They should stand in Civil War battlefields and civil war museums. That's where all of them should be, confederate and union. I was shocked to see so many in Baltimore (confederates)!

    I think they should just cease with the whole public statue thing altogether. I guess it's the old graven image thing. I also think that rushing out to put the new Governor's name on all the state signs is pretty stupid too.

    For good measure, I think Teddy Roosevelt should be sandblasted from the face of Mt Rushmore. Why someone thought he belonged with Lincoln, Jefferson and Washington I will never understand.
    Because his face was wide enough to cover up the clues to the Native American treasure, of course.
    PSA: Please realise the impotence of proof reading before you post.

  6. #6
    Super Moderator PawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond repute PawDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    44,803

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    This slippery slope will eventually offend Japanese and German Americans. The US flag is offensive to some already. It's madness!
    "eye fo an eye and toof fo a toof" - Idiot in Missouri

  7. #7
    Champ SicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond reputeSicemDawgz has a reputation beyond repute SicemDawgz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    East of the mighty Ouachita
    Posts
    5,371

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Andrew Jackson on the $20 bill.... literally everything offends someone in todays world.

  8. #8
    Dawg Adamant Argument Czar Guisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond repute Guisslapp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    In your mind and under your skin
    Posts
    17,251

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    I think the point RD was making was that the purpose of the statues was to offend, intimidate and disenfranchise.

    That is a bit different than doing something for a different reason and someone gets offended, no?

  9. #9
    Super Moderator PawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond repute PawDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    44,803

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Quote Originally Posted by Guisslapp View Post
    I think the point RD was making was that the purpose of the statues was to offend, intimidate and disenfranchise.

    That is a bit different than doing something for a different reason and someone gets offended, no?
    That may be the point he was making, however that tearing down is EXACTLY about being offended. This whole movement came about recently, not during the Obama Admin..
    "eye fo an eye and toof fo a toof" - Idiot in Missouri

  10. #10
    Dawg Adamant Argument Czar Guisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond repute Guisslapp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    In your mind and under your skin
    Posts
    17,251

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Quote Originally Posted by PawDawg View Post
    That may be the point he was making, however that tearing down is EXACTLY about being offended. This whole movement came about recently, not during the Obama Admin..
    So why keep them then? People are offended as the statues were designed to do. Are you saying people weren't offended before?

  11. #11
    Champ dawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond reputedawg80 has a reputation beyond repute dawg80's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    25,350

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    It is true, as I mentioned on another thread, ALL such monuments were erected decades after the War of Northern Aggression ended. This is true for statues dedicated to Confederates and to Yankees. In fact, the South led the way and after a time some in the north started saying, hey, we should erect monuments too.

    In the immediate aftermath of the war, for at least 20 years, no one, north or South, was interested in remembering the war. It was a terrible time in our history. Back then, there were tens of thousands of veterans going around on wooden legs, many missing arms, many disfigured by horrible wounds, and of course, there were the over 600,000 graves holding the dead. It wasn't until the 1890's that people began to reflect on the war and to understand and appreciate the enormous sacrifice of the average soldier and of the great generals. Monuments started to be erected to honor the fallen and to remember the single most influential event in our nation's history. It also sent a message to the whole world: a democracy can survive internal strife. In the mid-19th Century the USA was still considered a "great political experiment" whose success was still in doubt.

    I cannot say what motivated some to erect monuments in the early 20th Century. That article cited by RD claims the ONLY motivation was white backlash to political changes of the time. Maybe. Most of these monuments were put up by towns, counties, with the financial support of the state. Did some "redneck" town council in Bofunk, Mississippi erect a monument as a direct response to blacks winning more rights? I don't know. Perhaps that was their motivation. Or....maybe it wasn't.

    But, most Confederate monuments were erected to remember/honor a "lost cause." To honor soldiers who fought and many who died. For Southerners in the 1890's and the early 20th Century it was to "not forget" and by lack of action assume a position of indifference. "Are you a Son of the South, or are you not?" It was easy, 40 years after the war, to show support for the "lost cause" by agreeing, yeah, let's erect a statue to Robert E. Lee and/or one to remember our local regiment who fought in the war. That was the majority view of the time.

  12. #12
    Champ maverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond reputemaverick has a reputation beyond repute
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,731

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Quote Originally Posted by PawDawg View Post
    That may be the point he was making, however that tearing down is EXACTLY about being offended. This whole movement came about recently, not during the Obama Admin..
    Perhaps because the people who were (intentionally) intimidated and disenfranchised by the statues fear becoming marginalized again.

  13. #13
    Super Moderator PawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond repute PawDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    44,803

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Quote Originally Posted by Guisslapp View Post
    So why keep them then? People are offended as the statues were designed to do. Are you saying people weren't offended before?
    Quote Originally Posted by maverick View Post
    Perhaps because the people who were (intentionally) intimidated and disenfranchised by the statues fear becoming marginalized again.
    If this is about being offended then were is the line drawn? Japanese, Germans, Indians (no dot), etc.. can all claim being offended. It's like this...

    "I'll wake up today and look around for things that offend me because of my skin color, sexual orientation, or religious preference. If I take a stand - even if it includes violence - I and my "cause" will be better for it."
    "eye fo an eye and toof fo a toof" - Idiot in Missouri

  14. #14
    Dawg Adamant Argument Czar Guisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond reputeGuisslapp has a reputation beyond repute Guisslapp's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    In your mind and under your skin
    Posts
    17,251

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Quote Originally Posted by PawDawg View Post
    If this is about being offended then were is the line drawn? Japanese, Germans, Indians (no dot), etc.. can all claim being offended. It's like this...

    "I'll wake up today and look around for things that offend me because of my skin color, sexual orientation, or religious preference. If I take a stand - even if it includes violence - I and my "cause" will be better for it."
    Do you not distinguish between government acts that are intended to offend and those that have another purpose but have that effect?

  15. #15
    Super Moderator PawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond reputePawDawg has a reputation beyond repute PawDawg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    44,803

    Re: Civil War monument topic

    Quote Originally Posted by Guisslapp View Post
    Do you not distinguish between government acts that are intended to offend and those that have another purpose but have that effect?
    Like Obamacare premiums? Income tax rates? Mount Rushmore? Jefferson Memorial? Vicksburg National Park?
    "eye fo an eye and toof fo a toof" - Idiot in Missouri

+ Reply to Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts